1 |
Fernando J. Pereda wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 02:56:26PM -0700, Ryan Phillips wrote: |
3 |
>> I sorta like git in certain aspects. If git would work better than |
4 |
>> CVS or anything other SCM I'm for it. Right now, _anything_ would be |
5 |
>> better than CVS. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> I don't really know if Git is suitable for our workflow though... I was |
8 |
> just trying to clarify those issues you pointed out about Git. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I locally manage a couple of overlays with it, but nothing compared to |
11 |
> the portage tree. |
12 |
|
13 |
Nobody's explicitly mentioned this yet, but X.Org is switching a lot of |
14 |
its stuff over to git. That's the reason for keithp's parsecvs tool. The |
15 |
biggest one is the xserver CVS module, which has years of history and |
16 |
much more complex branching than anything I'm aware of in our CVS. |
17 |
|
18 |
They have a similar centralized development model to us, so it's a |
19 |
reasonable comparison. Although there are quite a few less files in |
20 |
their repo, arguments could be made for splitting up gentoo-x86 into one |
21 |
repo per subdirectory or similar. |
22 |
|
23 |
Thanks, |
24 |
Donnie |
25 |
-- |
26 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |